No Tears for Fidel,
Please
The murderous dictator put
revolution ahead of country, so shed them for the people and way of life he
repressed.
By George Weigel
From the Los
Angeles Times
GEORGE WEIGEL, a senior
fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, is the author of
"God's Choice: Pope Benedict XVI and the Future of the Catholic Church" and "Witness
to Hope: The
August 4, 2006
News that Fidel Castro
may be dead or dying has elicited a variety of sentiments, including an odd
grief tinged with an even odder respect. My first reaction, on hearing of
Castro's transfer of power to his equally lethal brother, Raul, was to
remember the strange circumstances in which I learned that Castro had publicly
denounced me to an international congress of journalists meeting in Havana in
late 1999.
I was having Christmas
dinner with family and friends in Rome when one of my hosts asked whether I
had seen the fax that the Cuban mission to the Vatican was sending around town.
I confessed that I hadn't, and the document was fetched. It turned out that,
in the course of a typical four-hour harangue, Castro had devoted a few
paragraphs to denouncing the "Yanqui" who had slandered him in my recently
published biography of Pope John Paul II. I was touched by Castro's
attentiveness — he actually called me something that can be printed here — but
I also was struck by his defensiveness and an insecurity unmitigated by age or
manifest power.
What I had written in "Witness
to Hope" was the plain truth: The papal pilgrimage to Cuba in January 1998 was
the first time in almost 40 years that Fidel Castro had not been the
undisputed center of attention at a public event in Cuba. I also had recounted
other aspects of the papal visit that Castro would have preferred to ignore,
such as the fact that John Paul II had not mentioned the Castro regime once in
five days; that the pope had tried, in various ways, to give back to the
people of Cuba the rich spiritual culture that was their birthright; that he
had challenged Cubans to be the protagonists of their history, rather than
thinking of themselves, as Castro had so long proposed, as victims of "Yanqui
aggression." El Jefe was not pleased.
I had barely made it to
Cuba in January 1998 — my first visa application was rejected, and it took an
intervention by Cardinal John O'Connor of New York to get me in; the cardinal
explained to the Cuban government that blocking the visa of the pope's
biographer would not look good. But once I had arrived, Cuba was unforgettably
vivid, the images of its destruction inescapable.
I remember walking the
streets of Havana, noting the crumbling buildings and the government office
windows held together with masking tape, and thinking that what should have
been one of the world's most beautiful cities had been reduced to a Caribbean
Sarajevo — not by mortars and rockets, but by mindless ideology. I remember
the Museum of the Revolution, in which the bloodstained sheet that had bound
the body of Che Guevara was displayed in an obscene knockoff of the Shroud of
Turin. I remember the goofy cartoon billboards all over the country — Cuba
kicking Uncle Sam in the pants, with stylized captions roaring defiance
against the imperialists. And I remember thinking that this is what a country
would look like if it were run for decades by a group of vicious teenagers.
I remember the barren
shelves in the pharmacies, with not even an aspirin to be had, despite the
propaganda about Cuban healthcare. I remember the teenage waiters and
waitresses at my hotel, who told me that 75% of their wages went to the
government. I remember talking to the prostitute — a well-spoken medical
doctor who, when I asked why she was selling herself, told me that it was the
only way to support her children. And I remember the elderly proprietor of a
restaurant overlooking the cove from which Hemingway's old man had set out to
the sea, telling me with tears running down his face that he had waited 40
years to hear someone — and now the pope! — defend Christian family life in
Cuba.
Whenever Castro dies,
the temptation to afford a measure of respect, however grudging, to the man
who continued to defy the world's lone superpower will be strong, at least in
some quarters. It should, however, be firmly resisted.
Castro is not a mass
murderer in the same league with Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao Tse-tung, but
he is a murderous dictator nonetheless. The stories of the vile and grotesque
conditions in which he keeps political prisoners should not be forgotten. Nor
should the injustices of previous Cuban regimes be cited as excuses for this
wicked man who reduced a proud and vibrant nation to penury and international
military prostitution in Africa.
In a statement read
after his surgery, Castro assured his countrymen that the defense of the
island was secure against the U.S. To the end, it seems, Castro will love the
revolution more than he loves Cuba. That is why he destroyed so much of his
country, and that is why no tears should be shed for him.